Effects of anonymity on online peer review in second-language writing

Bos, A.H. van den; Tan, Esther

doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103638

Cited by 26 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is essential to differentiate between meaningful writing and accurate writing (Jacobs & Karliner, 1977). Introduction of academic writing to college undergraduates is done to engage them in critical thinking and make them work on their HOCs in writing (Ali, 2016;Min, 2016;Van den Bos & Tan, 2019;Winder et al, 2016). The recreated DC in the present study will allow students to contemplate and interact on specific aspects of HOCs: focus/thesis/purpose, audience, organisation, and content development; and of LOCs: grammar (sentence structure, punctuation, prepositions, articles, verb tense), word choice and spellings (cf.…”

Section: Higher Order Concerns In Academic Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recreating Discourse Community for Appropriating HOCs in Law Undergraduates’ Academic Writing

Luhach¹

2020

ije

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Like any other discipline, academic writing is equally crucial for law undergraduates to master. Project reports, argumentative essay writing on current socio-legal affairs and research paper writing comprise requisites in academia for law learners. Students’ appropriation of higher order concerns in academic writing is a major challenge for teachers, as the physical classroom discourse community is typically passive and does not give enough opportunities to students to think critically about their writing processes. The teacher is expected to provide feedback to students on their writing, which often leads to the creation of only one feedback centre, restriction of the scope for varied perceptions and formation of multiple small discourses where the teacher is the central point of reference in every discourse. Consequentially, students can fail to develop self/peer-critiques in the ongoing discourse. The present paper has its focus on the recreation of discourse communities using a learning management system at the Law School, Bennett University, India, to promote peer-to-peer learning for honing higher order concerns in academic writing. The paper investigates how law students behave whilst interacting in a recreated online discourse community, benefit through peer feedback, and enhance their knowledge of the academic writing genre of argumentative essays, its subject matter and rhetoric involved. The methodological triangulation of pre-test/post-test analysis, student survey and conceptual content analysis of students’ interaction transcripts support recreation of online discourse communities in academic writing instruction.

show abstract

Section: Higher Order Concerns In Academic Writingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recreating Discourse Community for Appropriating HOCs in Law Undergraduates’ Academic Writing

Luhach¹

2020

ije

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies % Impacts of peer feedback on students' learning performance writing performance Cheng, Liang & Tsai, 2015;Jurkowski, 2018;Latifi, Noroozi, Hatami, & Biemans, 2019;Qing, 2019;Shang, 2019;van den Bos & Tan, 2019;Wu, Petit & Chen, 2015;Zheng, Cui, Li & Huang, 2017 Latifi, Noroozi, Hatami, & Biemans (2019) validity of peer suggestions compared to expert suggestions Wu, Petit & Chen (2015) Quality of peer feedback feedback quality produced by HEP and LEP students Wu (2019) 18.2 feedback quality index in different conditions: with a feedback request, a content checklist, a combination condition Gielen & De Wever (2015) quality of peer feedback in a repeating blind peer review cycle Gaynor (2019) quality of peer feedback in terms of affective, cognitive and metacognitive feedback Zheng, Cui, Li & Huang (2017) Qunayeer, 2019;Gaynor, 2019;Latifi, Noroozi, Hatami, & Biemans, 2019;Lin, 2018;Luo, 2016, Qing, 2019Vorobel & Kim, 2017;Yang, 2015;Yu, 2019 perceived challenges Al Qunayeer, 2019;Hung, 2016;Vorobel & Kim, 2017 students' appreciation of the module Latifi, Noroozi, Hatami, & Biemans (2019) perceived ease of use of the module Latifi, Noroozi, Hatami, & Biemans (2019) perceived enjoyment and motivation Grant (2016) perceived effort Grant (2016) perceived difference to regular class Grant (2016) perceived effects of the domain-general learning Latifi, Noroozi, Hatami, & Biemans (2019) pa...…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies that explored the impacts of peer feedback on learning performance (39.4%) centred around students' writing performance (Cheng, Liang & Tsai, 2015;Jurkowski, 2018;Latifi, Noroozi, Hatami, & Biemans, 2019;Qing, 2019;Shang, 2019;van den Bos & Tan, 2019;Wu, Petit & Chen, 2015;Zheng, Cui, Li & Huang, 2017) and speaking performance (Chien, Hwang & Jong, 2019;Liu, 2016).…”

Section: Leaning Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peer Feedback in Technology-Supported Learning Environment: A Comprehensive Review

Lam¹,

Habil²

2020

IJARBSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, a review of literature was undertaken to explore peer feedback studies in technologysupported learning environment. The objectives are to: (1) find out the extent to which technologysupported peer feedback has been studied in different contexts of teaching and learning (2) identify the opportunities/ affordances offered by technology-supported peer feedback activity and (3) summarize the potential challenges/ constraints of technology-supported peer feedback activity. Articles related to peer feedback practices conducted with the use of technology were searched from two databases: ScienceDirect and Taylor & Francis Online from 2015 to 2019. Of the final 33 articles selected for full review, 25 studies (75.8%) were conducted in the context of student writing and the three most productive research lines identified are different types/ characteristics of peer feedback, students' perceptions on their experience of doing peer feedback activity and the impacts of peer feedback on students' learning performance. Five most dominant affordances of technologysupported peer feedback activity were identified as follows: (1) opportunities to get high-quality feedback for student learning (2) promoting students' deep self-reflection (3) convenience and ease (4) creating a safe and supportive learning environment and (5) opportunities to get peer support through interaction. Meanwhile, four main challenges were summarized as: (1) students' lack of confidence to provide feedback (2) the lack of constructive peer feedback (3) students' lack of trust in their peers' ability to provide feedback and (4) students' lack of active response to peer feedback. Some recommendations arising from the review are also discussed in this paper.

show abstract

“…Peer review is a collaboration between students to provide constructive comments on each other's oral and written output with the goal of development (Jurkowski, 2018;Liu & Hansen, 2005). Students would get the two roles of an assessor who provides comments and an assessee who receives comments (van den Bos & Tan, 2019). Peer review has been criticized by the second language (L2) teachers and learners over the past decade, if it could help learners to write better (Saeed & Ghazali, 2016;Shang, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They argue that some factors such as the characteristics of peer comments, type of written tasks, peer review training, and modes of communication affect the incorporation rate of comments. Moreover, revision demands cognitive load for students as they compare their first drafts with the suggestions given in peer comments and decide to either accept or reject the comments (van den Bos & Tan, 2019). Different theories exist in the literature regarding the use of peer review in L2 settings such as process writing theory (Hayes & Flower, 1980), collaborative learning theory (Bruffee, 1984), sociocultural theory (SCT) (Vygotsky, 1978), and interactionist theory (Hyland & Hyland, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing peer review pattern and the effect of face-to-face and mobile-mediated modes on students’ academic writing development

Farahani¹,

Nemati²,

Montazer³

2019

Lang Test Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the distribution of peer review in face-to-face and mobilemediated peer review groups and their effects on students' revision skills and academic writing development. Seventy-two first-year English for academic purposes (EAP) students participated in an 18-session IELTS academic writing course in a Canadian university the mobile-mediated peer review group (MMPR) used Telegram to exchange peer comments synchronously, while the face-to-face peer review group (FFPR) did peer review in the classroom. An adapted analytic scheme (Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 193-227, 2003) and the IELTS academic writing assessment criteria were used to conceptualize the peer comments in terms of frequency, area, type, nature, and IELTS assessment categories. Results indicated that the total number of comments, the percentage of revision-oriented comments and actual revisions made by the MMPR group were statistically more significant than those by the FFPR group. Furthermore, the MMPR group made more local revisionoriented comments than that of FFPR. However, the revision-oriented suggestion in local areas was the most distributed type of comment made by both groups. Regarding the IELTS assessment criteria, the FFPR group made more comments on task achievement and coherence and cohesion, whereas the comments made by the MMPR group targeted more lexical resources, and grammatical range and accuracy. In addition, the results showed that both MMPR and FFPR groups developed their IELTS academic writing skills while the MMPR mode of collaboration outperformed the FFPR.

show abstract

Effects of anonymity on online peer review in second-language writing

Cited by 26 publications

References 44 publications

Recreating Discourse Community for Appropriating HOCs in Law Undergraduates’ Academic Writing

Recreating Discourse Community for Appropriating HOCs in Law Undergraduates’ Academic Writing

Peer Feedback in Technology-Supported Learning Environment: A Comprehensive Review

Assessing peer review pattern and the effect of face-to-face and mobile-mediated modes on students’ academic writing development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About